we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.

One of the ultra-conservative guys I work with, who parrots anything he gets from chain e-mails or Limbaugh, came in today with the conspiracy theory that the security was pulled from the embassy as part of a secret assassination "like in The Godfather." So it's not surprising to hear that Varus was listening to the same station today.

The fact that you had to google something which should be the biggest news story right now speaks volumes about how biased the media is.

Quote:

Falls into the "we had enough information that we should have seen it coming" category. Blame for scaling down security, etc.

No. It falls into the "We knew this was a terrorist attack committed against us on the anniversary of 9/11, but lied about it to the American people for political reasons". While the questions about whether there should have been better precautions taken prior to the attack are valid by themselves, those only point to incompetence. The facts showing that they knew darn well right after the attack happened that it was a terrorist attack and had nothing at all to do with some video, but 5 days later still sent the US ambassador to the UN around the talk circuit to convince people otherwise is where the whole thing escalates to the level of "cover up".

If it makes you feel better I have no idea whether they were talking about it or not, having not really watched the news in like 3-4 days. When I last left off they were talking about how awesome Romney was in the debate, and how he was closing ground on Obama...

If it makes you feel better I have no idea whether they were talking about it or not, having not really watched the news in like 3-4 days.

It has been on the news, just not the "OMG OBAMA IS ANTICHRIST" level of conspiracy theory gbaji wants it to be. If it makes you feel any better, it really isn't that big of a story to anyone that follows information for more than a day and doesn't just **** in their pants every story.

____________________________

George Carlin wrote:

I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.

If the answers were so unclear and things so murky, why then did the US ambassador to the UN go on 5 different news shows the following Sunday to repeat over and over that this was nothing but spontaneous violence erupting out of protests over an anti-Islamic video? And before you say that she was fired for this, her job is to be a mouthpiece for the Administration. There's no way her statements that day were her own.

Basically, everyone except the Administration's first response was "this was a terrorist attack". Yet, even days later, after the evidence that it was a terrorist attack was pretty much irrefutable, the Administration still clung to the whole protest over a video position. And it was a week after that when they finally acknowledged that it was a terrorist attack. To suggest that this was just changing information over time is nutty. It was an administration that realized that a terrorist attack reflected poorly on their foreign policy while an attack in response to a vile video (perhaps even one that could be linked somehow to conservatives) worked for them. So they went to the public with that second explanation, not because it was correct, but because it was politically useful.

If it makes you feel better I have no idea whether they were talking about it or not, having not really watched the news in like 3-4 days.

It has been on the news, just not the "OMG OBAMA IS ANTICHRIST" level of conspiracy theory gbaji wants it to be. If it makes you feel any better, it really isn't that big of a story to anyone that follows information for more than a day and doesn't just **** in their pants every story.

Well that's good.

I remember some "we're not sure if it's an attack or a random mob" thing, but I thought they decided it was an attack a long time ago. Then a controversy about the FBI people not getting there faster, and that's about where I last remember things being.

Oh! Also remember we had a thread about the gamer dude who died. Sad times.

If it makes you feel better I have no idea whether they were talking about it or not, having not really watched the news in like 3-4 days.

It has been on the news, just not the "OMG OBAMA IS ANTICHRIST" level of conspiracy theory gbaji wants it to be.

There's a pretty huge gap between "OMG OBAMA IS ANTICHRIST" and covering a story sufficiently that a random person has at least heard of the issue in question and doesn't have to google to find out what's going on. This has been a story for more than 3 or 4 days too. It will be a month tomorrow from the attack. It's been over three weeks since ambassador Rice went on the Sunday show circuit and lied for the Administration. It has been two weeks since Republican members of congress began calling for the resignation of Rice and an investigation into exactly what happened.

Today's hearings, much like the attack in Libya, didn't just spontaneously appear one day. They have been building for some time. The idea that even someone semi aware of politics would be so completely unaware that any of this was going on is sadly not surprising given the blatant liberal slant of much of the media. Simply not informing the public of events which might reflect poorly on people or party's they like has become a common means to manipulate public perceptions of events.

Which explains exactly why he had to google the story in the first place.

Quote:

If it makes you feel any better, it really isn't that big of a story to anyone that follows information for more than a day and doesn't just **** in their pants every story.

Why isn't it a big story? What would constitute a big story then? I think our government lying to us about a terrorist attack is a pretty big deal. Don't you?

There's a pretty huge gap between "OMG OBAMA IS ANTICHRIST" and covering a story sufficiently that a random person has at least heard of the issue in question and doesn't have to google to find out what's going on.

Like you, not everyone watches or reads the news on a daily basis? Well, not like you, since you make it painfully obvious you never do.

gbaji wrote:

I think our government lying to us about a terrorist attack is a pretty big deal. Don't you?

I know you don't, since you basically had the entire Bush administration cock in your mouth the whole time that was going on. But hey, go on and tell us about your new found morality.

Edited, Oct 10th 2012 7:07pm by lolgaxe

____________________________

George Carlin wrote:

I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.

Yeah, that Bush CIA analyst is a total tool, huh? Good thing you know better.

His statements that intelligence isn't perfect and we don't always know everything right off the bat are perfectly correct. This does not explain at all how 5 days after the attack, when it should have at least been understood that the attack was likely to have been a planned terrorist attack rather than a spontaneous event, Rice went on the talk shows saying the following:

Ambassador Rice wrote:

But our current best assessment, based on the information that we have at present, is that, in fact, what this began as, it was a spontaneous — not a premeditated — response to what had transpired in Cairo

There is no way in **** that this statement can be true Joph. Intelligence isn't perfect, but it's not that stunningly imperfect either. She didn't "hedge her language" as your linked article mentions. She made a straight out statement of facts that was simply not true. And not just something that we found out wasn't true later, but something that demonstrably was known to be false at the time. So either she just made stuff up on her own (unlikely given her position and job), or someone told her that was the official statement she was to give that day.

And that means an attempt to lie to the American people by the highest levels of the Obama administration. And it's why there are hearings going on right now. Yes, part of it is about security at the Embassies and whether they should have known an attack was coming. But the bigger part is whether the Obama Administration deliberately attempted to downplay the attack to make it seem like it was not an organized and planned act of terrorism and did so by directing ambassador Rice to make statements which they knew were not true.

His statements that intelligence isn't perfect and we don't always know everything right off the bat are perfectly correct. This does not explain at all how 5 days after the attack, when it should have at least been understood that the attack was likely to have been a planned terrorist attack rather than a spontaneous event, Rice went on the talk shows saying the following...

...yet he wrote it weeks later. As I said, what a tool, huh? Good thing you know so much better with all your intelligence analyst experience.

Why isn't it a big story? What would constitute a big story then? I think our government lying to us about a terrorist attack is a pretty big deal. Don't you?

Google 'WikiLeaks' and let me know what you find.

Besides, didn't we just do this with the fast and furious thing? Or the WMD thing? How about those nice safe oil rigs eh? Do you know what the word 'is' means? Pardon my asking, but how the heck are you still surprised and outraged at this stuff?

Monsieur Driftwood wrote:

Quote:

This is about an administration flat out lying to the american people in regard to what's happening in foreign relations.

How's that any different than any other administration in the last 70 years or so?

Yeah, there's a big story here. And it's not at all politically motivated.

Wingnuts will not be happy until they get the black man out of office, even if it means destroying this country in the process. Yay for self righteous indignation.

____________________________

"the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country." Hermann Goering, April 1946.

My personal favorite was when Issa was demanding to know if there was enough security and then got mad that people started talking about the recommended amount of security.

Good news though! Issa is ALSO now pledging to investigate and hold hearings on the latest unemployment numbers! So you just KNOW none of this is politically motivated

I'm half-expecting to hear that Issa's next investigation is into why only men are permitted to use the Congressional Men's Room, with a follow-up piece on Fox decrying the Obama administration's socialist plot to take away people's freedom to choose.

That man will investigate a thumb tack.

____________________________

"the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country." Hermann Goering, April 1946.

This is about an administration flat out lying to the american people in regard to what's happening in foreign relations.

How's that any different than any other administration in the last 70 years or so?

Or ever?

I'm not sure why the people think the government should tell them everything. If they don't like it, they should move to a country where the government is completely open about everything that happens, even before the facts are sorted....